Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

taibbi.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

931–940 of 981 posts

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#931

Post by Eupolemos »

prohobo wrote: post #782

To anyone reading these threads who is disconcerted by all the apologists, rationalizations, and blindness: Hello, this is what modern totalitarianism looks like. The whole point is to shake the foundations of your principles, and make you doubt yourself. Corporations that control 90% of the internet, and therefore public discourse, are hiding behind the technicality of being private entities, and therefore can enfor…

> We must hear people out, even if they're wrong.

So, I'm going to pull out good old Harry Frankfurt here and his "On Bullshit".

If the one you debate is debating in good faith, you are right.

If the one you debate is bullshitting, you are wrong.

"Bullshitting" is not caring about true or false, but simply arguing for an effect.

If someone argues in good faith but is "wrong", hear them out. In particular, it is easy to dismiss someone who proposes horrible solutions to problems. Just realize, the problem may be very real, even if their proposed solution is horrifying.

On top of that, people will propose straight up mad solutions, if they feel nobody cares about their problems.

Just recognize that we are talking about two very different things here; bullshitting and being "wrong". And they need to be handled differently.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#932

Post by xg15 »

thu2111 wrote: post #929
hackyhacky wrote: post #886

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most prominent examples of modern anti-science in the US, such as in climate change, abortion, and epidemiology, do not find their roots in well-justified scepticism of particular scientists. Climate deniers don't care what science says, or how reliable peer-reviewed journals, and have no interest in the scientific method: they base their opposition in ideological grounds: "I don't believe climate change to be tr…

As someone who has rationally argued against epidemiology based on finding a constant stream of severe errors in their papers, I can assure you that epidemiology is almost entirely pseudo-scientific. I don't think I've ever encountered a field as disastrous as this one (though I've never really looked at climatology). Epidemiology has so many massive cultural and methodological issues you could write an entire book a…

> if they can get a more dramatic paper by using data that's 8 months old and based on a sample size of 7 people when they could use data published last week and which has a sample size of hundreds of thousands, they'll happily pick the former every time.

Do you have a particular example of this?

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#933

Post by rendall »

prohobo wrote: post #911
rendall wrote: post #902

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "To anyone reading these threads who is disconcerted by all the apologists, rationalizations, and blindness:" That's me! I'm disconcerted by this! What words of comforting wisdom do you have for me? > "...this is what modern totalitarianism looks like" sad trombone

Haha, apologies... At least it's only soft totalitarianism, or inverted. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism I think it's encouraging that there's a way to categorize what's happening, because it suggests an alternative route, or at least a way to engage with it without feeling crazy. These are strange times, and a lot of smart people seem to be voting in favor of their own defeat. A tough que…

Well, I didn't disagree with you. I was just hoping you had a solution. I don't have one.

For me I keep hoping people will have an epiphany: "Could my contempt for half of the country be at least part of the problem?"

It's always "other group" who is instigating Bad, and "our group" who is fighting for Good. To many it's a literal bare-knuckled fight against "evil", not realizing or not caring that their own tactics and outlook are themselves destabilizing. The media is just feeding into it. I don't see any easy way out.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#934

Post by hackyhacky »

galfarragem wrote: post #907
michaelmrose wrote: post #859

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Half of people have a below average IQ. More like 65% of older adults are both below average thinkers and above average voters. Why would you think skepticism would be a suitable response to misinformation? The only mathematically viable way to combat such misinformation is to disenfranchise people too stupid to be in charge of anything that effects other people's lives.

Do you sincerely think that a person that manages to be elected is stupid? An elected president might be a lot of stuff, some of them bad, but stupid he surely isn't.

I actually can't tell if you're being sarcastic.

Intelligence is not a prerequisite for being elected, and in many cases intelligence is a disadvantage. Most people are stupid, and they would rather see one of their own in positions of power. Dumb people can more easily connect with certain areas of the electorate.

Examples of this phenomenon are so copious and obvious that I shan't point them out.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#935

Post by hackyhacky »

cmdshiftf4 wrote: post #897
hackyhacky wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure you mean that sarcastically, but you shouldn't. It's fun to complain about "the establishment," until it isn't there anymore. In the current case, "the establishment" means American democracy, which is built on people's faith in the institution of elections. If you erode that faith, democracy no longer works. That may be fine with you, but it's not fine with me.

>That may be fine with you, but it's not fine with me. It is fine with me. If the choice is between continuing down the path we're on and some unknown chaos, I'm willing to roll the dice on the chaos. At least it would be interesting .

Have you lived in a country where the establishment fails? Iran (1979), Soviet Union (1989), Turkey (take your pick)?

Yep, interesting times.

If boredom is the greatest difficulty you face, you're very fortunate. At least have consideration for those who value stability.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#936

Post by hackyhacky »

lliamander wrote: post #903
hackyhacky wrote: post #893

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is frankly naive. Many earnest people repeat dangerous lies, and wicked people are more that willing to use the truth, especially if it is an uncomfortable truth that is important but overlooked by polite society. Correct. That's why I said the difference is intent. You have not contradicted that. > On the contrary, I can do a much better job at the scale I operate at than YouTube can do at the scale it operat…

> Correct. That's why I said the difference is intent. You have not contradicted that. You are mistaken. The earnest falsehood can cause great damage, and the truth - even when spoken by someone of ill intent - is still important. Your standard of intent is simply not sufficient. So called "hateful" people are sometimes necessary to break the stranglehold bad ideas have on society. Socrates was executed for "corrupti…

> The earnest falsehood can cause great damage, and the truth - even when spoken by someone of ill intent - is still important.

I didn't say that earnest falsehoods can't cause damage, I merely said that it's not a weapon. Someone who is weaponizing information to achieve their own ends definitely knows what they're doing. And obviously, speaking the truth, regardless of intent, is not a case of misinformation.

To draw an analogy: I'm not saying we should outlaw guns. I'm saying we should outlaw murder. The problem is not the spread of opinions the problem is the intentional use of insincerely held opinions to cause damage.

I support the right for everyone to make up their own mind, which is exactly why I oppose weaponized misinformation. I don't even know what it would mean to oppose the right for everyone to make up their own mind. Reminds of the caps from the Tripod Trilogy.

The power of those with great wealth to influence others should not be underestimated. We're not immune. If you want to live in a society where everyone makes up their own mind, don't let them join a cult.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#937

Post by poutrathor »

hackyhacky wrote: post #607
ceilingcorner wrote: post #495

I find it really disconcerting how many people on Hacker News want a corporate entity to decide what information is deemed acceptable to know. Do you even know where that word came from? The irony is almost overwhelming. But I digress... The idea that banning certain information will somehow result in it disappearing has been shown repeatedly to not work. A cursory reading of history should make this clear. You canno…

It's not about banning disagreement. It's not even about opinions. It's about combating weaponized misinformation. It's strange for Americans to be on the business side of a propaganda weapon, as we're more used to using against our enemies. Technology has finally made it feasible for malicious actors to cheaply and effectively manipulate people with lies, here in the US. If you don't believe it's a weapon, you're wr…

> It's strange for Americans to be on the business side of a propaganda weapon, as we're more used to using against our enemies.

Funny that no top replies pounced on that starting axiom. USA have been widely known as a propaganda massive producer firstly toward its own citizens, even today. From military cult, pledge at schools, commies witch hunting and globalisation hammering, and of course, all your religions and sub-religions, you all have been living and keep living inside daily propaganda.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#938

Post by [deleted] »

Eupolemos wrote: post #931
prohobo wrote: post #782

To anyone reading these threads who is disconcerted by all the apologists, rationalizations, and blindness: Hello, this is what modern totalitarianism looks like. The whole point is to shake the foundations of your principles, and make you doubt yourself. Corporations that control 90% of the internet, and therefore public discourse, are hiding behind the technicality of being private entities, and therefore can enfor…

> We must hear people out, even if they're wrong. So, I'm going to pull out good old Harry Frankfurt here and his "On Bullshit". If the one you debate is debating in good faith, you are right. If the one you debate is bullshitting, you are wrong. "Bullshitting" is not caring about true or false, but simply arguing for an effect. If someone argues in good faith but is "wrong", hear them out. In particular, it is easy…

[deleted]

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#939

Post by prucomaclu »

dragonwriter wrote: post #443
prucomaclu2 wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is indeed a fair point. Several of the lawsuits have been dismissed on the general basis that "election laws being broken is not evidence that fraud occurred". It's logically a true statement, and I think it's a fair opinion to have. But I do disagree with it: The laws regarding poll observers are designed to detect fraud. It is extremely hard to detect fraud when the poll observers aren't allowed to do their jo…

> Several of the lawsuits have been dismissed on the general basis that "election laws being broken is not evidence that fraud occurred". I do not believe that is correct. I have seen none for which that is the case. Several have been dismissed because (1) process changes that they claimed violated election laws were well-known long before the election and, if they were illegal, had a viable remedy before the electio…

As one example, the Michigan case King v Whitmer:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905...

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mied.350905...

In the plaintiff's prayer for relief, one of the reliefs requested was that illegal ballots be thrown out (illegal ballots, meaning ballots counted in a manner that did not comply Michigan Election Code)

The judge however has determined that the requested redresses would not be available, because it would disenfranchise voters. Because of this, she would not be able to provide redress "Even assuming that Plaintiffs establish injury-in-fact and causation under this theory".

This was one of the main reasons for the opinion. There were other reasons (e.g. laches). The issue of redress / equal protection, however, was repeated several times in the judgement.

For the most part, the judgement does not address the actual claims being made. Below is one of the few quotes where she does address the actual claims:

> For example, the closest > Plaintiffs get to alleging that physical ballots were altered in such a way is the > following statement in an election challenger’s sworn affidavit: “I believe some of > these workers were changing votes that had been cast for Donald Trump and other > Republican candidates.”9

The above statement, as far as I can tell, is just factually not true. The plaintiffs do allege that physical ballots were altered in a fraudulent way. See the section: "Election Officials Added Votes and Removed Votes from “OverVotes”.

Re: The YouTube ban is un-American, wrong, and will backfire

#940

Post by [deleted] »

rendall wrote: post #933
prohobo wrote: post #911

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha, apologies... At least it's only soft totalitarianism, or inverted. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism I think it's encouraging that there's a way to categorize what's happening, because it suggests an alternative route, or at least a way to engage with it without feeling crazy. These are strange times, and a lot of smart people seem to be voting in favor of their own defeat. A tough que…

Well, I didn't disagree with you. I was just hoping you had a solution. I don't have one. For me I keep hoping people will have an epiphany: "Could my contempt for half of the country be at least part of the problem?" It's always "other group" who is instigating Bad, and "our group" who is fighting for Good. To many it's a literal bare-knuckled fight against "evil", not realizing or not caring that their own tactics…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN